Perverting the Month of the Most Sacred Heart

by Thomas A. Droleskey

There was a time almost exactly eleven years ago now when I was driving from Reno, Nevada, where I had been visiting a generous Catholic who funded my "Living in the Shadow of the Cross" and "To Be Catholic from the Womb to the Tomb" lecture programs from September of 2000 to April of 2003, to Albuquerque, New Mexico, to give a lecture there. The drive was long, over a thousand miles. About half of the drive took me through desert roads in the wasteland known as Nevada. It's a drive I never want to make again even though I made great time driving at breakneck speeds during the middle of the night. Let me explain why.

Although I do not get overcome by feelings of oppression on a regular basis, I did have a palpable sense of evil as I drove through the Nevada desert late at night into the early hours of the next morning (and, no, I can't recall the exact dates as there has been some "slippage" of the memory on some details while others are retained unfailingly, at least up until now). The reason for this palpable sense of evil became clear as I saw little red lights stationed at the driveways of "ranches" alongside US-95 and US-93 in those Nevada counties that permitting human beings to sell themselves to engage in the commission of various sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. "Wow," I said to myself, this is a mockery of the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Most Blessed Sacrament and of His Most Sacred Heart that beats within It."

Red vigil lamps burn near that Real Presence of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament, signifying that the One Who redeemed us by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross because of His love of His Co-Eternal and Co-Equal Father in Heaven and his love of us awaits our acts of adoration, thanksgiving, reparation and petition as His Most Sacred Heart pulsates radiant beams of that Divine love to warm us in the midst of the chills of this passing world, full of so many problems, many of which, of course, we cause for ourselves, especially by refusing to accept God's will for us in our lives and refusing to embrace the crosses that He sends us, each of which has been perfectly fitted by Him for us from all eternity. Each cross we are given is the means by which we can give honor and glory to the Most Blessed Trinity through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, out of which the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus that beats for us with such love in the tabernacle was formed.

It is thus understandable that the devil would want to mock the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Most Blessed Sacrament by having people of bad reputation, shall we say, advertise themselves by means of a red light and that their districts of sin be known as "red light districts." It is also understandable that the devil would want to make this month of June, the month of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus into a celebration of perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments as all manner of lewd, vulgar, obscene and disgusting spectacles take place in city after city in the United States of America and elsewhere in the so-called "civilized" or "developed" world.

Unspeakable and unprintable displays and sounds that come straight from Hell will make themselves particularly present in front of the Cathedral of Saint Patrick on the parade route, Fifth Avenue, on Sunday, June 26, 2011. Thousands of cheering spectators will be watching along the sidewalks, applauding furiously when reprehensible sins are committed right on Fifth Avenue in front of the Cathedral of Saint Patrick. There will be whistles and drums. It is all straight from Hell, every single bit of it.

Politicians aplenty of both organized crime families of naturalism in this country, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, will be marching. The reprobate nanny-state pro-abortion "straight billionaire playboy" (a phrase he used to describe himself when campaigning for his first term as New York City Mayor in 2001), Michael Bloomberg, who lives off and on with a woman, Diana Taylor, a pro-abort who had been courted unsuccessfully by Republican naturalists last year, 2010, to consider a run against the pro-abortion Methodist Hillary Rodham Clinton's replacement in the United States Senate, United States Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, yet another pro-abortion Catholic. United States Senator Charles H. Schumer, a militantly pro-abortion adherent of the Talmud, will be marching, replete with his Cymric smile, undaunted by the demise of his smarmy, perverted protege, former United States Representative Anthony Weiner (D-Brooklyn, New York; see Caligula's Got Nothing On This Crowd).

At the forefront of next week's parade, which will take place on the Sunday in the Octave of the Ascension (the Second Sunday after Pentecost), will be the Catholic pro-abort, pro-perversity Governor of the State of New York, Andrew Mark Cuomo, whose defections from the Faith have been chronicled any number of times on this site in the past year, including in Memo to Andrew Cuomo, So Much Confusion, So Little Time, If Only Catholics Spoke This Way, "Lucky" Mario May Not Be So "Lucky" In The End and Memo To Howard Hubbard: Public Scandal Is Never A Private Matter, will be at the head of the parade, heralded as the "champion" of "marriage equality" for those engaged in unrepentant acts of perversity in violation of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.

Indeed, it is as of this writing, Friday, June 17, 2011, Ember Friday in the Octave of Pentecost, that the New York State Senate, which is controlled by the naturalists of the "right" by a two seat majority, 32-30, over the naturalists of the "left," is considering passage of a bill to "legalize" so-called "same-sex marriage" that has been on the top of Governor Andrew Cuomo's legislative agenda. And must ever be the case in this world of naturalism, a world that is filled with the illogic of emotionalism and sentimentality, some Republican state senators in the Empire State are "agonizing" over how to vote:

ALBANY — A senior Republican lawmaker from the Hudson Valley, seeking to balance religious liberty and gay rights, is emerging as a pivotal voice in the State Senate as Republicans debate whether to allow a vote on the legalization of same-sex marriage, lawmakers and advocates for the bill said on Thursday.

The lawmaker, Stephen M. Saland, 67, of Poughkeepsie, represents a traditionally Republican but increasingly diverse district, and advocates of same-sex marriage have long considered him a potential vote for gay marriage, even though he voted against the measure two years ago. But Mr. Saland, a practicing lawyer, is said to be concerned about the scope and the depth of protections for religious organizations in the marriage bill.

The legislation, which has been championed by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and was narrowly approved on Wednesday by the Assembly, includes provisions that exempt religious institutions from any obligation to solemnize or provide facilities for same-sex weddings. But some Republican lawmakers are seeking further changes to address those concerns. A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo declined to comment on the discussions.

Mr. Saland, who declined to be interviewed for this article, told a reporter this week that he was undecided on same-sex marriage. His final judgment on the matter is expected to be enormously influential among a small bloc of Republican senators who are privately open to voting for same-sex marriage but who say they are concerned about how the bill could affect religious institutions. Friends and colleagues described Mr. Saland as a legislator’s legislator, soft-spoken and scholarly, known for attention to detail and interested in children’s and family issues.

“If you want to know what a bill actually does, go to Steve Saland,” said Assemblyman Joel M. Miller, a Poughkeepsie resident who was among the first Republican lawmakers in the state to back same-sex marriage. “He does his homework, he studies these bills, and because he does that, he will probably know far more about the bill than people who just casually read the title.”

Mr. Miller added: “I think he would like to do this. I think he certainly has said that he’s on the fence.”

Mr. Cuomo, a first-term Democrat, met with Mr. Saland, a 10term Republican, on Wednesday night to discuss the lawmaker’s concerns, administration officials said. Mr. Saland has also aired his views in private discussions with fellow Republicans, lawmakers and advocates of same-sex marriage said.

Senator John J. Flanagan, a Long Island Republican who voted against same-sex marriage two years ago but is thought to be reconsidering this year, also praised Mr. Saland’s role.

“I would say he’s extremely principled, he’s very thoughtful, and he has the ability to focus on the details — which, in this case, are extremely important,” Mr. Flanagan said. “He really pays a lot of attention to policy and to details.”

John Faso, the 2006 Republican candidate for governor, who is a friend and constituent of Mr. Saland’s, said he thought the repercussions for Mr. Saland would be limited, regardless of his decision. “I would support him no matter what way he voted, and I think most people in his district would too,” he said.

“People know,” Mr. Faso added, “he wouldn’t make a rash decision.”

With 31 of 62 members of the Senate now in support of same-sex marriage — 29 Democrats and 2 Republicans — Republicans continued their private deliberations over the issue for a second day on Thursday. Their leader, Dean G. Skelos, a Long Island Republican, said that no decision had been made on whether to bring the legislation to a vote, and that no further support for the measure had emerged. This year’s legislative session is scheduled to end on Monday.

Conservative religious leaders and representatives of the New York State Catholic Conference made the rounds of the Capitol on Thursday seeking to press their case against the measure.

“We are relaying our very serious concerns to members of the Legislature regarding the religious liberty implications of Governor Cuomo’s bill,” said Dennis Poust, a spokesman for the conference. “It should be noted that we will continue to strongly oppose any redefinition of the historic understanding of marriage, regardless of the strength of the religious liberty protections. However, should the bill pass without adequate protection, it will have potentially far-reaching consequences for our ministries, both in terms of contracts to provide services and potentially to challenges to not-for-profit status.”

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, a supporter of same-sex marriage and the biggest single financial supporter of the Senate Republican caucus, addressed the Republican senators privately as they met to discuss the bill. Speaking to reporters after his meeting, Mr. Bloomberg said he believed that the bill would pass, with several votes to spare.

“I still believe if they do vote their hearts and principles, New York State will become the next state to adopt marriage equality,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “Because based on my conversations with senators, I believe that if the bill comes to the floor, it will pass. And I’m very hopeful that will be any day now.”

The mayor did not identify the lawmakers from whom he expected support, but he mentioned three Republican senators he had spoken with in recent weeks: Andrew Lanza of Staten Island, Mark Grisanti of Buffalo and Mr. Flanagan.

“In all my conversations with senators — Senator Lanza, Senator Flanagan, Senator Grisanti — and many others, I could see how personal this was for them and their families, how carefully they were listening to both their parents and children, and how earnestly they are struggling to find the right answer,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “This is not an easy issue.”

Some potential votes for same-sex marriage appeared to be slipping away on Thursday. Greg Ball, a Republican senator from the Hudson Valley who had been heavily lobbied by advocates for the bill and Republican donors who support same-sex marriage, called Mr. Cuomo’s bill “an affront to religious organizations” lacking broad enough protections for religious institutions.

The bill, Mr. Ball said, “would open up a new era of lawsuits against individuals and religious organizations.” (In Gay Marriage Debate, a Republican Is Pivotal.)

 

Even though the New York "Catholic" Conference is lobbying, however belatedly, against the passage of this bill, the fact that the matter is considered debatable in the first place is the result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution against the Divine Plan that Our King instituted to effect man's return to Him through His Catholic Church, a revolution whose consequences helped to give rise to the welter of naturalistic forces that can be described collectively as Judeo-Masonry. The fact that large numbers of Catholic support this odious measure is the result of the sacramental barrenness of the conciliar church's liturgical rites, making Catholics more and more susceptible to the slogans used by those engaged in perversity to sport themselves as leaders of a "civil rights" movement to protect a "bullied minority" from living as "second class citizens" in a "free" country.

The "agonizing" of New York state senators on the matter of "marriage" between persons of the same gender is all-too-reminiscent of what occurred forty-one years ago when the New York State Legislature was considering a measure to permit the surgical assassination of children in the first twenty-four weeks of their development in their mothers' wombs. It was a Catholic state senator, the late Edward Speno, who cast the deciding vote in favor of baby-killing.

Speno voted for that original baby-killing law in New York on March 18, 1970, and maintained his "good standing" what he thought was the Catholic Church. His bishop, Bishop Walter Philip Kellenberg, who was named by Pope Pius XII as the founding bishop of the Diocese of Rockville Centre on April 16, 1957, did not discipline him in the slightest. God, however, had other plans for Speno, who died suddenly of a heart attack at the age of fifty, less than a year after he voted to permit baby-killing under cover of the civil law in the State of New York. This is the section from Speno's obituary in The New York Times:

Although the Senator, a Catholic, was identified with his church on school aid, he broke with the hierarchy last year and voted for abortion liberalization. He explained his stand by saying that he did not want to impose his personal beliefs on others. (The New York Times, "Senator Edward Speno Dies; Favored Parochial School Aid, February 17, 1971. This is one of those articles that I had to purchase to get the exact quote that I wanted before typing in the text manually. I may not be--and have never claimed to be an intellectual., great or otherwise. I am, however, a pretty decent researcher.)

Edward Speno did not "want to impose his personal beliefs on others." He was reminded at the moment of his own Particular Judgment that morality exists in the very nature of things. The tenets of the Natural Law are knowable by reason. The Catholic Church is merely the eternal guardian and infallible explicator of those tenets so as to remove confusion from the minds of men so clouded by, at least in some instances, Original Sin (and its vestigial after-effects in the souls of the baptized) and Actual Sins to aid them in understanding the Natural Law more clearly and to strengthen their wills by means of Holy Mother Church's sanctifying offices to speak up in their defense. There also happens to be Fifth Commandment: Thou shalt not kill.

As Pope Leo XIII explained in Sapientiae Christianae, January 11, 1890:

Now, if the natural law enjoins us to love devotedly and to defend the country in which we had birth, and in which we were brought up, so that every good citizen hesitates not to face death for his native land, very much more is it the urgent duty of Christians to be ever quickened by like feelings toward the Church. For the Church is the holy City of the living God, born of God Himself, and by Him built up and established. Upon this earth, indeed, she accomplishes her pilgrimage, but by instructing and guiding men she summons them to eternal happiness. We are bound, then, to love dearly the country whence we have received the means of enjoyment this mortal life affords, but we have a much more urgent obligation to love, with ardent love, the Church to which we owe the life of the soul, a life that will endure forever. For fitting it is to prefer the good of the soul to the well-being of the body, inasmuch as duties toward God are of a far more hallowed character than those toward men.

Moreover, if we would judge aright, the supernatural love for the Church and the natural love of our own country proceed from the same eternal principle, since God Himself is their Author and originating Cause. Consequently, it follows that between the duties they respectively enjoin, neither can come into collision with the other. We can, certainly, and should love ourselves, bear ourselves kindly toward our fellow men, nourish affection for the State and the governing powers; but at the same time we can and must cherish toward the Church a feeling of filial piety, and love God with the deepest love of which we are capable. The order of precedence of these duties is, however, at times, either under stress of public calamities, or through the perverse will of men, inverted. For, instances occur where the State seems to require from men as subjects one thing, and religion, from men as Christians, quite another; and this in reality without any other ground, than that the rulers of the State either hold the sacred power of the Church of no account, or endeavor to subject it to their own will. Hence arises a conflict, and an occasion, through such conflict, of virtue being put to the proof. The two powers are confronted and urge their behests in a contrary sense; to obey both is wholly impossible. No man can serve two masters, for to please the one amounts to contemning the other.

As to which should be preferred no one ought to balance for an instant. It is a high crime indeed to withdraw allegiance from God in order to please men, an act of consummate wickedness to break the laws of Jesus Christ, in order to yield obedience to earthly rulers, or, under pretext of keeping the civil law, to ignore the rights of the Church; "we ought to obey God rather than men." This answer, which of old Peter and the other Apostles were used to give the civil authorities who enjoined unrighteous things, we must, in like circumstances, give always and without hesitation. No better citizen is there, whether in time of peace or war, than the Christian who is mindful of his duty; but such a one should be ready to suffer all things, even death itself, rather than abandon the cause of God or of the Church. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

 

Did Edward Speno know this? Well, perhaps he was taught this at Niagara University, which is under the control of the Congregation of the Mission (the Vincentian Fathers of Saint Vincent de Paul) when he studied there from 1938 to 1944. Perhaps. He sure did not learn it from his own bishop, Walter P. Kellenberg (who was the bishop who confirmed me at Saint Aloysius Church on March 21, 1961). Why not? Well, the bishop who consecrated Father Walter P. Kellenberg, a native of the Borough of the Bronx in the City of New York, as a auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of New York on October 5, 1953, was none other than Francis Cardinal Spellman, an Americanist who had undermined the efforts of the bishops of Puerto Rico in 1960 to oppose a referendum that sought to permit the sale of contraceptives on this once Catholic island that was defaced by the introduction of Protestant "churches" and Masonic lodges there following the American triumph in the Spanish-American War of 1898 (see As New Dog and Pony Shows Come To Town, part three.)

Although Bishop Walter Kellenberg did not insist that the pastor (whose name I simply do not have at my fingertips to use, sad to say) of Saint Raphael's Church in East Meadow, New York, who refused Speno a "Mass of Christian Burial" reverse himself, he did permit such a "service" to be staged at Sacred Heart Church in North Merrick, New York. This was the first known instance, at least to me, of a Catholic who cooperated formally in making surgical baby-killing "available" under cover of the civil law receiving what purported to be a Catholic funeral service. Many have been the occasions since this that this has been done, scandalizing "pro-life" Catholics and "pro-life" non-Catholics alike. Apart from William Brennan and Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Thomas P. O'Neill and Edward Moore Kennedy (Another Victim of Americanism; Behold The Free Rein Given to Error; Behold The Free Rein Given to Error; Unfortunate Enough to Be A Baby; Unfortunate Enough to Be A Baby; Beacon of Social Justice?; Spotlight On The Ordinary; What's Good For Teddy Is Good For Benny; Sean O'Malley: Coward and Hypocrite: More Rationalizations and Distortions just in case you have forgotten what happened just about twenty-two months ago now).

Thus it is that the "agonizing" by some New York state senators over a matter that is so fundamentally perverse, defying the laws of God and nature, is just a replay of what happened forty-one years ago as another of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, willful murder, was permitted under cover of the civil law. Lost on all of those caught in the grip of this "agony" is the simple fact that this matter is quite simple to understand. God created males and females as mutually complementary to each other, giving them the awesome power to procreate the species in order to welcome as many or as few children He sees fit to bestow upon them and to educate their offspring in the Catholic Faith so that they can populate Heaven for all eternity by seeking to please God with every beat of their hearts, consecrated as they must be to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Lost on these poor, misguided souls as they agonize over a bill whose immorality is patently clear are these simple facts that must be stated again and again to counter the ethos of emotionalism and sentimentality that are but the logical rotten fruit of naturalism:

1) God's love for us is an act of His divine will, the ultimate expression of which is the salvation of our immortal souls.

2) Our love for others must be premised on willing for them what God wills for us: their salvation as members of the Catholic Church.

3) We love no one authentically if we do or say anything, either by omission or commission, which reaffirms him in a life of unrepentant sin.

4) Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ hates sin. He wills the sinner to repent of his sins by cooperating with the graces He won for them on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into his heart and soul through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

5) One of the Spiritual Works of Mercy is to admonish the sinner. We have an obligation to admonish those who are in lives on unrepentant sin to turn away from their lives of sin and to strive to pursue the heights of sanctity.

6) God has compassion on all erring sinners, meaning each one of us. He understands our weakness. He exhorts us, as He exhorted the woman caught in adultery, to "Go, and commit this sin no more."

7) It is not an act of "love" for people to persist in unrepentant sins with others.

8) It is not an act of "judgmentalness" or "intolerance" to exhort people who are living lives of unrepentant sin to reform their lives lest their souls wind up in Hell for eternity.

9) Mortal Sins cast out Sanctifying Grace from the soul. Those steeped in unrepentant mortal sin are the captives of the devil until they make a good and sincere Confession to a true priest.

9) Certain sins cry out to Heaven for vengeance. Sodomy is one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.

10) Those engaged in natural or unnatural acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments do not "love" the individuals with whom they are sinning. Authentic love cannot exist in a soul committed to a life against the Commandments of God and the eternal welfare of one's own soul, no less the souls of others.

11) Those engaged in natural  or unnatural acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments are not fit to adopt children.

12) Those engaged in natural or unnatural acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments are not fit to adopt children because their very sinful lives put into jeopardy the eternal of the souls of the children they seek to adopt. It is not possible for people who are sinning unrepentantly to teach children to hate sin as God hates sin. They are immersed in sin. Pope Pius XI put it this way in Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930:

But Christian parents must also understand that they are destined not only to propagate and preserve the human race on earth, indeed not only to educate any kind of worshippers of the true God, but children who are to become members of the Church of Christ, to raise up fellow-citizens of the Saints, and members of God's household, that the worshippers of God and Our Savior may daily increase.

 

13) Those engaged in unnatural, perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments are further unfit to adopt children because they have no right in the Divine Positive Law or the natural law to live together as a "couple."  Once again, Pope Pius XI's Casti Connubii:

Nor must We omit to remark, in fine, that since the duty entrusted to parents for the good of their children is of such high dignity and of such great importance, every use of the faculty given by God for the procreation of new life is the right and the privilege of the married state alone, by the law of God and of nature, and must be confined absolutely within the sacred limits of that state.

 

14) Those engaged in unnatural, perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandment have no right in the Divine Positive Law or the Natural Law to present a "model" of parenthood that is from the devil himself. The words that Saint Paul wrote about perversity in Rome in his own day are quite apropos of our own:

Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use against which is their nature.

And in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.

And as they liked not to  have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy.

Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.  (Romans 1: 24-32)

15) Matrimony was elevated to a Sacrament by Our Lord at the wedding feast in Cana. The Holy Sacrament of Matrimony is entered into by one man and by one woman to achieve these ends: the procreation and education of children, the mutual good of the spouses, a remedy for concupiscence. Pope Pius XI noted this in Casti Connubii:

This conjugal faith, however, which is most aptly called by St. Augustine the "faith of chastity" blooms more freely, more beautifully and more nobly, when it is rooted in that more excellent soil, the love of husband and wife which pervades all the duties of married life and holds pride of place in Christian marriage. For matrimonial faith demands that husband and wife be joined in an especially holy and pure love, not as adulterers love each other, but as Christ loved the Church. This precept the Apostle laid down when he said: "Husbands, love your wives as Christ also loved the Church," that Church which of a truth He embraced with a boundless love not for the sake of His own advantage, but seeking only the good of His Spouse. The love, then, of which We are speaking is not that based on the passing lust of the moment nor does it consist in pleasing words only, but in the deep attachment of the heart which is expressed in action, since love is proved by deeds. This outward expression of love in the home demands not only mutual help but must go further; must have as its primary purpose that man and wife help each other day by day in forming and perfecting themselves in the interior life, so that through their partnership in life they may advance ever more and more in virtue, and above all that they may grow in true love toward God and their neighbor, on which indeed "dependeth the whole Law and the Prophets." For all men of every condition, in whatever honorable walk of life they may be, can and ought to imitate that most perfect example of holiness placed before man by God, namely Christ Our Lord, and by God's grace to arrive at the summit of perfection, as is proved by the example set us of many saints.

This mutual molding of husband and wife, this determined effort to perfect each other, can in a very real sense, as the Roman Catechism teaches, be said to be the chief reason and purpose of matrimony, provided matrimony be looked at not in the restricted sense as instituted for the proper conception and education of the child, but more widely as the blending of life as a whole and the mutual interchange and sharing thereof. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 29, 1930.)

16) It is never permissible to put even one child into spiritual, if not physical, jeopardy by claiming that so many others would be helped if the Church did not cooperate with an unjust law. Our Lord said that it would be better for one to have a millstone thrown around his neck and thrown into a lake than to lead one of his little ones astray. He was not joking.

17) The civil state has no authority from God to sanction illicit relationships, whether between a man or a woman (such as Andrew Cuomo's relationship with his current girlfriend, which he is publicly flaunting) or between those of the same gender who are committing sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance. What Pope Pius XI wrote in Casti Connubii about "civil unions" between unmarried men and women applies just as equally to those who are committed the sin of Sodom:

To begin at the very source of these evils, their basic principle lies in this, that matrimony is repeatedly declared to be not instituted by the Author of nature nor raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a true sacrament, but invented by man. Some confidently assert that they have found no evidence of the existence of matrimony in nature or in her laws, but regard it merely as the means of producing life and of gratifying in one way or another a vehement impulse; on the other hand, others recognize that certain beginnings or, as it were, seeds of true wedlock are found in the nature of man since, unless men were bound together by some form of permanent tie, the dignity of husband and wife or the natural end of propagating and rearing the offspring would not receive satisfactory provision. At the same time they maintain that in all beyond this germinal idea matrimony, through various concurrent causes, is invented solely by the mind of man, established solely by his will.

How grievously all these err and how shamelessly they leave the ways of honesty is already evident from what we have set forth here regarding the origin and nature of wedlock, its purposes and the good inherent in it. The evil of this teaching is plainly seen from the consequences which its advocates deduce from it, namely, that the laws, institutions and customs by which wedlock is governed, since they take their origin solely from the will of man, are subject entirely to him, hence can and must be founded, changed and abrogated according to human caprice and the shifting circumstances of human affairs; that the generative power which is grounded in nature itself is more sacred and has wider range than matrimony -- hence it may be exercised both outside as well as within the confines of wedlock, and though the purpose of matrimony be set aside, as though to suggest that the license of a base fornicating woman should enjoy the same rights as the chaste motherhood of a lawfully wedded wife.

Armed with these principles, some men go so far as to concoct new species of unions, suited, as they say, to the present temper of men and the times, which various new forms of matrimony they presume to label "temporary," "experimental," and "companionate." These offer all the indulgence of matrimony and its rights without, however, the indissoluble bond, and without offspring, unless later the parties alter their cohabitation into a matrimony in the full sense of the law.

Indeed there are some who desire and insist that these practices be legitimatized by the law or, at least, excused by their general acceptance among the people. They do not seem even to suspect that these proposals partake of nothing of the modern "culture" in which they glory so much, but are simply hateful abominations which beyond all question reduce our truly cultured nations to the barbarous standards of savage peoples. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 29, 1930.)

 

There is no such understanding of these simple truths today even in many quarters of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, where pastors of some parishes and heads of many religious communities are completely supportive of "marriage equality" while maintaining their "good standing" in the conciliar structures. Although proposals to "legalize" "marriage" between persons of the same gender can be opposed by making advertence to the Natural Law, such advertence cannot withstand the pressures brought by the tide of sentimentality and emotionalism that are bound to prevail absent a reliance upon the Ten Commandments and thus of what is pleasing God and good for souls as taught by Holy Mother Church.

None of the New York state senators, some of whom are funded to the hilt by the pro-abortion, pro-perversity New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is also funding the campaign in support of the "marriage" bill under consideration at this time, who are "agonizing" over their vote understand the world through the simple eyes of the Holy Faith. Indeed, none understand that many saints punished their bodies brutally by severe fasting and by the most austere sort of living, sleeping on floors instead of beds, subjecting their flesh to mortifications in order to curb its unruly desires by exercising mastery over the temptation to indulge the body and worldly comforts.

What applies to the "agonizing" New York state senators at this time applies as well to the statists and the walking dead amongst the one-world-government types who cast votes at the United Masonic Nations Organization, whose Human Rights Council, based in Geneva, Switzerland, voted today by a 23-19 nation majority to express "grave concerns" about "abuses" committed by those who identify themselves by the commission of perverse acts in violation of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments and against those who have attempted to "change" their gender (see United Nations Human Rights Council Expresses Grave Concern for "Rights" of Perverts). What was that Giovanni Montini/Paul VI said about the United Masonic Nations Organization on October 4, 1965? Ah, yes, see the appendix below.

Our nanny-state despots and envirocommunists who want to "save the planet" as they plunge future generations into oceans of debt that will enslave people for decades to come, if God in His Mercy grants the world that length of time, care nothing for the welfare of the immortal soul or the fact that there is a God Who judges them at the moment of their deaths. They are pantheists, dirt-worshipers who believe that human beings are the problem on the face of this earth, and that only those who "behave" according to their specifications and dictates, which they seek to impose by means of laws and policies enforced rigorously by the civil state, are fit to participate in the delicate "ecosystem" dance that is "biodiversity." They want us to punish our bodies according to their disordered "lights" purely for purposes of social engineering and envirocommunism as they engage and support the most wanton forms of debauchery the world has seen since the times of the last centuries of the Roman Empire.

To their ranks must be added some of those clerics and lavender activists in the conciliar structures justify their support for unrepentant sins against nature to as to justify themselves before men. They are as militant and as "in your face" as they are because their mission is convince everyone, including God Himself, that they are right, that anyone who opposes them is "hateful" and opposed to "human rights." Thus it is that they must protest that the following warning that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ gave about the fate of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha wasn't really spoken by Him but was placed in His mouth by others, which is utter blasphemy against God the Holy Ghost, Who inspired every word of Sacred Scripture to be written exactly as we read them today:

And into whatsoever city or town you shall enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and there abide till you go thence. And when you come into the house, salute it, saying: Peace be to this house. And if that house be worthy, your peace shall come upon it; but if it be not worthy, your peace shall return to you. And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet. Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. (Matthew 10: 11-15.)

 

Our Lord was wrong? The destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha by fire and brimstone as a just punishment for the vile sins of their inhabitants? Can this be?

Of course.

It is impossible to pursue the common temporal good while supporting those things that are repugnant to the peace and happiness of eternity:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

Pope Saint Pius V explained that death was the only fitting penalty for clerics who persisted in this sin against nature that has been "mainstreamed" to such an extent in our midst that various professional athletes are championing "marriage equality" alongside the vapid ignoramuses and walking, living freak shows called "entertainers." The world has gone mad because of the absence of Sanctifying Grace. Most people alive today would recoil at these words of Pope Saint Pius V:

That horrible crime, on account of which corrupt and obscene cities were destroyed by fire through divine condemnation, causes us most bitter sorrow and shocks our mind, impelling us to repress such a crime with the greatest possible zeal.

Quite opportunely the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] issued this decree: "Let any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature . . . be removed from the clerical order or forced to do penance in a monastery" (chap. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a grave offense may not advance with greater audacity by taking advantage of impunity, which is the greatest incitement to sin, and so as to more severely punish the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime and who are not frightened by the death of their souls, we determine that they should be handed over to the severity of the secular authority, which enforces civil law.

Therefore, wishing to pursue with the greatest rigor that which we have decreed since the beginning of our pontificate, we establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime, by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss. (Pope Saint Pius V, Horrendum illud scelus, August 30, 1568)

 

Just a slightly different approach, wouldn't you say? A true pope understood the horror of such a detestable sin on the part of the clergy and sought to administer punishment to serve as a medicinal corrective for other priests and to demonstrate to the laity the horrific nature of such a moral crime. A false "bishop" seeks to protect his "institution" and the "clerical club." Quite a different approach.

Mind you, I am not suggesting the revival of this penalty in a world where it would not be understood and where the offender would be made a "martyr" for the cause of perversity, only pointing out the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that clerics and others in ecclesiastical authority who are guilty of serious moral crimes are deserving of punishment, not protection, by their bishops. Such is the difference yet again between Catholicism and conciliarism, a false religion that cannot withstand the currents of perversity because its own liturgical rites and doctrines are perverse and loathsome in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity.

God cares about matters of moral integrity just as much as He cares about doctrinal integrity, and it is indeed very telling that the conciliarists, who scoff in many instances at the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church and who openly blaspheme and betrayal Our Lord by entering into false places of worship without ever saying a word about the fact that those who "worship" there need to convert to the true Faith, are "easy" on hardened sinners who flaunt their sins in public and who are very "easy" on themselves as they commit gross sacrileges and are manifestly negligent in their duties to perform the Spiritual Works of Mercy that are necessary for one to show forth his charity for others in a concrete way when circumstances call for them to be performed.

That which is false, founded in one condemned proposition after another, will show forth its sterility over the course of time as it tolerates all manner of errors on a practical level that, at least theoretically, are condemned "officially" but without, at least for the most part, any disciplinary actions imposed upon those who hold and promote those errors publicly. It is pretty difficult for the lords of conciliarism to have a consistent policy of discipline with those who defect from articles contained in the Deposit of Faith and who promote grave moral evils when each of them, without exception, defies the ancient anathemas of the Catholic Church concerning the nature of dogmatic truth, false ecumenism and "inter-religious prayer services" and as they support openly such things as separation of Church and State and religious liberty while pretending to "worship" God by means of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service.

We have much reparation to make to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our sins and for those of the whole world. Much reparation to make, especially in this month of June that has been so perverted by ecclesiastical practitioners of perverse liturgies and doctrines and by the practitioners of perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.

With Our Lady as our sure guide and intercessor, may we indeed be ever earnest about making reparation for our own many sins, each of has contributed to the worsening of the state of the Church Militant here on earth and of the world-at-large. Once again, make no mistake about it: our own sins and our ingratitude and our lukewarmness have exacerbated, that is, worsened, the state of the Church Militant on earth. We cannot be content to wallow in spiritual mediocrity. We must accept whatever penances and humiliations that God chooses to send us so that we can give them back to His Most Sacred Heart through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother as her consecrated slaves, especially by means of praying as many Rosaries as our states-in-life permit.

Our Lady stands by the tomb of her Divine Son, Who has been buried mystically by the conciliarists' contempt for the truths that He has revealed exclusively through His Catholic Church and have been taught infallibly by her without any hint or shadow of change from Pentecost Sunday. We must keep her company at that tomb in our prayers, being ever willing to take on more penances and to renounce our own comfort and convenience and all attachment to human respect in order to help to usher in the day when the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary will make it possible for the enemies of her Divine Son in the modern world and in the grips of Modernism will be vanquished, permitting the restoration of all things in Christ the King as we honor her as our Immaculate Queen.

 

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Perpetual Help, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints

Appendix A

"The peoples of the earth turn to the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace"

This encounter, as you well understand, is of a twofold nature: it is marked both with simplicity and with greatness. Simplicity, because you have before you a man like you, your brother, and indeed one of the smallest among you who represent sovereign States; for he is vested, if you wish to think of him as thus, with only a minuscule and, as it were, symbolic temporal sovereignty, only as much as is necessary to be free to exercise his spiritual mission and to assure those who deal with him that he is independent of every other sovereignty of this world. He has no temporal power, nor any ambition to compete with you. In fact, We have nothing to ask for, no question to raise. We have at most a desire to express and a permission to request: namely, that of serving you in so far as lies within Our competence, with disinterest, humility and love.

This is the first statement We have to give you. As you see, it is so simple that it may seem insignificant to this Assembly, which is accustomed to dealing with matters that are extremely important and difficult. However, We also said and all here today feel it that this moment is a singularly great one. It is a great moment for Us, a great one for you.

For Us. You know well who We are. Whatever may be the opinion you have of the Pontiff of Rome, you know Our mission. We are the bearer of a message for all mankind. And this We are, not only in Our own personal name and in the name of the great Catholic family, but also in the name of those Christian brethren who share the sentiments We express here, and particularly of those who kindly charged Us explicitly to be their spokesman here. Like a messenger who, after a long journey, finally succeeds in delivering the letter entrusted to him, We are conscious of living through a privileged moment, however brief, which fulfills a desire cherished in Our heart for nearly twenty centuries. For, you remember, We have been journeying long and We bring with Us a long history; We here celebrate the epilogue of a toilsome pilgrimage in search of a conversation with the entire world, from the day the command was given to Us: "Go and bring the good tidings to all peoples." And it is you who represent all peoples.

Let Us tell you that We have a message for all of you, a good message to deliver to each one of you.

Our message is meant to be, first of all, a moral and solemn ratification of this lofty institution. This message comes from Our historical experience. It is as an "expert in humanity" that We bring to this Organization the suffrage of Our recent Predecessors, that of the entire Catholic Episcopate, and Our own, convinced as We are that this Organization represents the obligatory path of modern civilization and of world peace.

In saying this, We feel We are speaking with the voice of the dead as well as of the living: of the dead who have fallen in the terrible wars of the past, dreaming of concord and world peace; of the living who have survived those wars, bearing in their hearts a condemnation of those who seek to renew them; and of those rightful expectation of a better humanity. And We also make Our own, the voice of the poor, the disinherited, the suffering; of those who long for justice for the dignity of life, for freedom, for well being and for progress. The peoples of the earth turn to the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace. We presume to present here, together with Our own, their tribute to honour and of hope. That is why this moment is a great one for you also. We know that you are fully aware of this. Now for the continuation of Our message. It looks entirely towards the future. The edifice which you have constructed must never collapse; it must be continually perfected and adapted to the needs which the history of the world will present. You mark a stage in the development of mankind; from now on retreat is impossible; you must go forward. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI's Address to the United Nations, October 4, 1965.)

[Thomas A. Droleskey commentary: The United Nations Organization has "gone forward" all right. It is not retreating from its promotion of one evil after another. Here, by way of contrast, is how Pope Pius XI dismissed the League of Nations in his first encyclical letter, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

Appendix B

From Pope Pius XI's Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922

The only remedy for such state of affairs is the peace of Christ since the peace of Christ is the peace of God, which could not exist if it did not enjoin respect for law, order, and the rights of authority. In the Holy Scriptures We read: "My children, keep discipline in peace." (Ecclesiasticus xli, 17) "Much peace have they that love the law, O Lord." (Psalms cxviii, 165) "He that feareth the commandment, shall dwell in peace." (Proverbs xiii, 13) Jesus Christ very expressly states: "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's." (Matt. xxii, 21) He even recognized that Pilate possessed authority from on High (John xiv, 11) as he acknowledged that the scribes and Pharisees who though unworthy sat in the chair of Moses (Matt. xxiii, 2) were not without a like authority. In Joseph and Mary, Jesus respected the natural authority of parents and was subject to them for the greater part of His life. (Luke ii, 51) He also taught, by the voice of His Apostle, the same important doctrine: "Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God." (Romans xiii, 1; cf. also 1 Peter ii, 13, 18)

If we stop to reflect for a moment that these ideals and doctrines of Jesus Christ, for example, his teachings on the necessity and value of the spiritual life, on the dignity and sanctity of human life, on the duty of obedience, on the divine basis of human government, on the sacramental character of matrimony and by consequence the sanctity of family life -- if we stop to reflect, let Us repeat, that these ideals and doctrines of Christ (which are in fact but a portion of the treasury of truth which He left to mankind) were confided by Him to His Church and to her alone for safekeeping, and that He has promised that His aid will never fail her at any time for she is the infallible teacher of His doctrines in every century and before all nations, there is no one who cannot clearly see what a singularly important role the Catholic Church is able to play, and is even called upon to assume, in providing a remedy for the ills which afflict the world today and in leading mankind toward a universal peace.

Because the Church is by divine institution the sole depository and interpreter of the ideals and teachings of Christ, she alone possesses in any complete and true sense the power effectively to combat that materialistic philosophy which has already done and, still threatens, such tremendous harm to the home and to the state. The Church alone can introduce into society and maintain therein the prestige of a true, sound spiritualism, the spiritualism of Christianity which both from the point of view of truth and of its practical value is quite superior to any exclusively philosophical theory. The Church is the teacher and an example of world good-will, for she is able to inculcate and develop in mankind the "true spirit of brotherly love" (St. Augustine, De Moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae, i, 30) and by raising the public estimation of the value and dignity of the individual's soul help thereby to lift us even unto God.

Finally, the Church is able to set both public and private life on the road to righteousness by demanding that everything and all men become obedient to God "Who beholdeth the heart," to His commands, to His laws, to His sanctions. If the teachings of the Church could only penetrate in some such manner as We have described the inner recesses of the consciences of mankind, be they rulers or be they subjects, all eventually would be so apprised of their personal and civic duties and their mutual responsibilities that in a short time "Christ would be all, and in all." (Colossians iii, 11)

Since the Church is the safe and sure guide to conscience, for to her safe-keeping alone there has been confided the doctrines and the promise of the assistance of Christ, she is able not only to bring about at the present hour a peace that is truly the peace of Christ, but can, better than any other agency which We know of, contribute greatly to the securing of the same peace for the future, to the making impossible of war in the future. For the Church teaches (she alone has been given by God the mandate and the right to teach with authority) that not only our acts as individuals but also as groups and as nations must conform to the eternal law of God. In fact, it is much more important that the acts of a nation follow God's law, since on the nation rests a much greater responsibility for the consequences of its acts than on the individual.

When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another's word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)